[Fluffy]

---

IMPs all vul, your attemp to buy it cheap in 2M didn't work out as hoped.

You lead low spade, partner plays ♠K, and Declarer wins ♠A. Next comes ♣J on wich partner will play ♣7 (STD carding). What's your plan?

[the hog]

Low S to partner's J for a H through.

[JLOGIC]

Not gonna lie, I was having an EXTREMELY hard time counting this hand out then realized dummy had 12 cards.

[JLOGIC]

I was like...if we underlead we lose when partner has 6413 and like KQxx of hearts...personally I'd never preempt with that shape though

[MrAce]

Deleted

EDIT: LoL, now i also see dummy 12 cards after reading Justin, Fluffied !

[wank]

in isolation, i'm not keen on this underleading business (even assuming dummy has 2 spades in his 13 hard hand) - partner could have put the J on at t1 with kj so declarer may well have AJ tight.

i won't bother trying to count out the hands until we have accurate count on the dummy.

[Fluffy]

dummy had 5 clubs sorry, I put 2x♣8. Shouldn't post while playing.

[bluecalm]

Small heart.
a)Partner could take spade with J from KJ, it was safe.
b)In all likelyhood declarer has AQxxxx/Axxxxx/AQxxx of diamonds, he showed A♠ and J♣ I think almost all hands with additional K♥ in there would overcall directly over our multi.

Btw, what should club signal show ? J♠ or A/K♥ ? Count doesn't make sense once we take the ace.

[mich-b]

Assuming pd would play the ♠J From KJxxxx (wouldn't he?), it makes sense to cash the ♠Q , and watch partner's card (suit preference).

[gnasher]

At the table I'd ask some questions about the opponents agreements. Does a delayed 3♦ simply show a weaker hand than a direct one? Would a double of 2♠ have been for takeout, and if so could he do it on a 2452 shape? What would a direct double of 2♦ have shown?

I agree with Wank's point about partner playing ♠J at trick one. Hence I'm never underleading ♠Q. I'd cash ♠Q and see what partner does. If he gives suit preference for hearts, I'll underlead ♥A. If he doesn't, I'll play a second club, for want of anything better to do.

Edit: I see that mich-b made the same point in fewer words.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

JLOGIC, on 2012-January-17, 20:30, said:

I was like...if we underlead we lose when partner has 6413 and like KQxx of hearts...personally I'd never preempt with that shape though

6413 = 14 ( I never open with that shape either ).

[whereagles]

Agree pard might have played ♠J trick 1 if he had it. But regardless of that, heart ace looks best now. It loses only if pard has ♠J AND ♥Q.

[whereagles]

JLOGIC, on 2012-January-17, 20:30, said:

I was like...if we underlead we lose when partner has 6413 and like KQxx of hearts...personally I'd never preempt with that shape though

Oh I doubt that. I'm sure you'll miscount and do it at some stage, ahah.

[bluecalm]

This reminds me of my great bridge moment when after 5 tricks opponent claimed without showing his hand ("I have this and this card, 11 tricks") and I told him he had 12 cards. It turned out I was right

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Fluffy, on 2012-January-17, 18:23, said:

---

IMPs all vul, your attempt to buy it cheap in 2M didn't work out as hoped.

You lead low spade, partner plays ♠K, and Declarer wins ♠A. Next comes ♣J on which partner will play ♣7 (STD carding). What's your plan?

Upon Declarer's lead of the ♣J , the outstanding ♣ were 10 7 4 and partner played the 7 . ( Why? )

If it is showing Count -- a doubleton here -- how are we going to set if partner does not have the ♠J or the ♥K ?

Maybe gnasher's eventual lead of the 2nd ♣ might work ( after ♠Q and NO suit preference for ♥ .
.....If Declarer had a 2nd ♣, he will win and have to lead a 3rd hoping to set up 2 needed discards for ♥.
..... If partner's singleton ♦ is the EIGHT, his ruff will effect an uppercut.... giving you the 4th trick: one trick in each suit.

[MrAce]

As i posted and deleted in my first attempt when it was 12 cards, i am not keen on playing small ♠ really.

And i dont really care if pd wld play the J or not on first round, if i was your pd i would be playing K from KJ since i underlead Aces of our raised suits when i feel we may have only 1 trick in this suit and i want my pd to be on lead by the time we get this trick.

I am not cashing, not even touching my ♥A either like Nuno suggests.

I'd probably cash ♠Q and after that would likely play small ♥.

whereagles, on 2012-January-18, 09:12, said:

Agree pard might have played ♠J trick 1 if he had it. But regardless of that, heart ace looks best now. It loses only if pard has ♠J AND ♥Q.

No, it loses also and especially when pd has Kxx

[aguahombre]

The points about the king or jack of spades being played at trick one have one further wrinkle, IMO. This is not a situation where one might have reasonably underled the spade ace at trick one, so I discount that.

What I do consider, however, are two reasonable things: the obvious ---that partner doesn't hold the Jack; and the subtle ---that partner doesn't want me to lead a spade to him and chose not to play the Jack (which means no QX of hearts in her hand). Perhaps she wants me to lead the ace of hearts with a doubleton, but a small one with AJX (unsure whether declarer has one more or one less heart himself).

I would choose an immediate low heart. Cashing the spade first might prove less than effective if partner is 7-long in spades.

[MrAce]

aguahombre, on 2012-January-18, 19:23, said:

I would choose an immediate low heart. Cashing the spade first might prove less than effective if partner is 7-long in spades.

It is ironic that someone who thinks this is not an underlead spade A situation and that it should be discounted, also thinks pd may have 7 ♠. Because if he has 7♠, could it be the only way to defeat 4♦ to underlead spades ? (or underleading heart ace)

KJxxxxx
Txx/Qxx
x
7x


In a way you disagreed with your own opinion There are also other dummies different than the current one where underleading spade ace would be VITAL. I am not saying we must underlead if we had spade Ace, but i think it is not even close to be ruled out as an option if South had it.

Why is it so odd to underlead my ace when my pd opened it as weak 2 vulnerable and i have 2 side aces ? Cmon now ... Perhaps at mp, or even at imp one may argue that against 4 level contract holding 3 aces in hand one shd not underlead, which is a good argument but not finding pd with spade K or finding opponents who compete to 4 level with our K in their hand being less likely is also a good argument imo.

[aguahombre]

There might be a difference between underleading a bullet at trick one and underleading one when getting a re-entry later.

The difference might involve having more information, seeing dummy, etc.

[Trinidad]

I find this a difficult problem. My instinct tells me to duck the ♣A, twice if necessary. I would hope for the 8 or Q of trumps with partner. That means that I gave declarer one trick, but that he has to fight for the other ones.

I may be looking like an idiot. I may even be an idiot. But it would be the way I would play.

Rik